Free Essay

Nadel Et Al V Burger King Corp

In: Other Topics

Submitted By cahcain
Words 1465
Pages 6
Carmelita Cain
MGMT 520
Week 3 Assignment

Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp. & Emil, Inc. case

1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points)
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, HAMILTON COUNTY 2. According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points)
Emil moved for summary judgment, claiming that no genuine issue of material fact existed.
BK also moved for summary judgment and pointed to evidence in the depositions that appellants knew the coffee was hot and that coffee was purchased and served as a hot beverage. It also contended under the circumstances that Evelyn's and Paul's actions were intervening, superseding causes precluding any actionable negligence on its part. 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points)
Christopher Nadel received second degree burns from coffee spilling on his right foot purchased at Burger King by his grandmother Evelyn Nadel. The Nadel’s brought suit against Burger King and franchise owner Emil, Inc, for product liability for a defectively designed product and for failure to warn of the dangers of handling a liquid served as hot as their coffee.
The court granted both the Burger King owner and Burger King Corporation request for motion of summary of judgments. The Nadel’s appealed. The court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The summary judgment was wrongly granted on the products liability and related punitive damage claims. Issues of fact remained as to whether the coffee was defective due to the heat at which it was served and whether an adequate warning existed. Because the alleged failure to warn involved a product, not premises, summary judgment was properly granted as to premises liability. Plaintiffs' claims of emotional damage were inadequate to support their claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress. 4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points)
The case was not of negligent infliction of emotional distress because the records contained no evidence of serious emotional distress and the spill of the coffee wasn’t caused by Burger King.
The tort approved by the court was for punitive damages. The parties could not prove if the coffee was too hot to serve. 5. According to the case, why didn't the court approve summary judgment for product liability claims? (5 points)
The defendants on products liability claims of design defect and failure to warn because genuine issues of material fact remain whether the coffee was so hot that its risks outweighed its benefits under R.C. 2307.75(A); whether the coffee was so hot that it was not as safe as an ordinary consumer would expect under R.C. 2307.75(A); and whether the risk of second-degree burns was an unforeseen danger that required a warning under R.C. 2307.76(A). http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy.devry.edu/hottopics/lnacademic 6. Do you agree with this decision? Why or why not? (5 points)
Yes, I agree with the decision because we have to trust the business that we patronize, would not sell us any products that could bring us due harm. Yes, we know that the coffee should be hot, but not hot enough to cause bodily injury.

Barbara K. Thompson, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Sunbeam Products, Inc., et al., Defendants.

A. the name and citation of the case (5 points)
Barbara K. Thompson, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Sunbeam Products, Inc., et al., Defendants 2012 U.S. App. Lexis 22530 (6th Cir.) (6th Cir. Ohio, 2012) B. the name of the court which decided the case (3 points)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO, EASTERN DIVISION C. the year of the decision (2 points)
2011
D. the facts of the case (5 points)
Barbara Thompson purchased a Sunbeam Mixmaster at Wal-Mart. Ms. Thompson ring finger was caught by one of the beaters when she was attempting to fix one of the beaters that wasn’t inserted correctly, while the mixer was still on. It was stated that the beater got hung on a ring, the finger was lodged in between the beaters, which resulted in her finger having to be amputated in the knuckle area. E. the issue of the case (5 points)
Plantiff:
1. defective manufacture and/or construction 2. defective design and/or formulation 3. inadequate warnings 4. nonconformance with manufacture's representations 5. Wal-Mart for supplier's liability 6. breach of the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for use 7. action for breach of the express warranties that the product was free from defects in workmanship and materials 8. claim of common law product liability 9. cause of action for strict product liability 10. claim against all defendants for deceptive acts and unconscionable practices in violation of the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act ("CSPA") 11. punitive damages against Sunbeam and Simatelex 12. cause of action asserts a claim on behalf of Mr. Thompson against all defendant for loss of consortium 13. asserts a claim for breach of implied or express contract against Wal-Mart 14. common law negligence against all defendants Defendants: 15. Defendants moved for summary judgment on all of plaintiffs' claims. F. the “decision” of the case (5 points)
Responses are corresponding to the numbered claims above: 1. Granting summary judgment on manufacturing defect claim where plaintiff failed to present evidence showing that his injuries were caused by a manufacturing defect and not by other possibilities, such as his own negligence. 2. Summary judgment granted on defective design claim where plaintiff presented no expert analysis or other evidence demonstrating that some aspect of the design was defective). No genuine dispute has been shown to exist in regard to the claim of defective design or formulation, and Sunbeam and Simatelex are entitled to summary judgment on this claim. 3. No genuine dispute has been shown to exist in regard to plaintiffs' claim of inadequate warnings, and Sunbeam and Simatelex are entitled to summary judgment on this claim. The hazard was created by Mrs. Thompson bringing her hand into close proximity with the moving beaters, which caused her ring finger to be pulled into the two beaters. The risk of injury from placing one's hands near rapidly turning beaters is an open and obvious risk or a risk that is a matter of common knowledge. 4. There is no evidence that Sunbeam or Simatelex breached any express warranty to plaintiffs. No evidence of any express warranties which may have been made in connection with the sale of the mixer is included in the record. Sunbeam and Simatelex are entitled to summary judgment on this claim. 5. Wal-Mart is entitled to summary judgment on the fifth cause of action.
6-9; 13&14. Warranty claims are preempted by the OPLA.
10. Plaintiffs do not address defendants' arguments concerning the CSPA claims in their memorandum contra defendants' motion for summary judgment on these claims. There is no evidence in the record that defendants engaged in any unfair or deceptive act or practice, as described in Section 1345.02(A), or any unconscionable act or practice as described in Section 1345.03(A). Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims under the CSPA.
12. Since this court has determined that defendants are entitled to summary judgment on all of Mrs. Thompson's substantive claims, defendants are also entitled to summary judgment on the twelfth cause of action, Mr. Thompson's loss of consortium claim.
The final judgment is that all of the summary judgments were in favor of the defendants for all of the plaintiff claims. G. the principle of law the case was used (cited) for in the case (5 points)
The principle of law this case was use for is the Ohio Product Liability Act.
2307.74. When product is defective in manufacture or construction

A product is defective in manufacture or construction if, when it left the control of its manufacturer, it deviated in a material way from the design specifications, formula, or performance standards of the manufacturer, or from otherwise identical units manufactured to the same design specifications, formula, or performance standards. A product may be defective in manufacture or construction as described in this section even though its manufacturer exercised all possible care in its manufacture or construction.
Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 2307.74 H. Following the directions in the library, download a Word document copy of the case, and include your name in the “note” section of the download. Attach a copy of the document with your assignment this week. (10 points) (Your name must be in the automatically populated “note” area for full points for this.).

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Nadel V. Burger King

...summary judgment? (3 points) a. In the case of Nadel et at v. Burger King Corp. & Emil Inc., “the trial court granted the motions of both defendants for summary judgment”. 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) b. The facts of this case are that Christopher Nadel suffered from second degree burns to his right foot after being burned by hot coffee ordered from a Burkger King drive-thru. Christopher was seated in middle front seat between his father, Paul and Grandmother, Evelyn. Evelyn received a burn to her right leg when tasting her coffee and it was too hot. Christopher’s second degree burns resulted when Evelyn was placing her coffee down and Paul pulled into the street. On behalf of Christopher, the Nadels sued the owner of Burger King for product liability and failure to display hot warning labels. The owner of Burger King and Burger King Corp. moved for summary judgment which the trial court granted. Burger King stated they were immune to product liability because they aren’t the manufacturer, seller, or supplier of the faulty cups. 4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points) c. This is not a negligent infliction of emotional distress case because Burger King (1) did not burn the Nadels intentionally or recklessly. (2) Burger King’s conduct was not outrageous and the conduct......

Words: 332 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Nadel V. Burger King

...summary judgment? (3 points) a. In the case of Nadel et at v. Burger King Corp. & Emil Inc., “the trial court granted the motions of both defendants for summary judgment”. 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) b. The facts of this case are that Christopher Nadel suffered from second degree burns to his right foot after being burned by hot coffee ordered from a Burkger King drive-thru. Christopher was seated in middle front seat between his father, Paul and Grandmother, Evelyn. Evelyn received a burn to her right leg when tasting her coffee and it was too hot. Christopher’s second degree burns resulted when Evelyn was placing her coffee down and Paul pulled into the street. On behalf of Christopher, the Nadels sued the owner of Burger King for product liability and failure to display hot warning labels. The owner of Burger King and Burger King Corp. moved for summary judgment which the trial court granted. Burger King stated they were immune to product liability because they aren’t the manufacturer, seller, or supplier of the faulty cups. 4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points) c. This is not a negligent infliction of emotional distress case because Burger King (1) did not burn the Nadels intentionally or recklessly. (2) Burger King’s conduct was not outrageous and the conduct......

Words: 332 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Mgmnt 520 Week 3 Devry University

...Assignment: For this assignment, you will need to access the LexisNexis database in the Keller Library, from the Student Resources area under Course Home. Go to Kubasek, Chapter 13, page 369, problem 13-16. Use LexisNexis in the Keller library and look up the Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp. & Emil, Inc. case. Use the citation you find in your book to do the search. Read the case and answer these questions. Copy and paste this information into a Word document, include your name on that document, and answer the questions. 1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points) Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County. 119 Ohio App.3d 578 (1997) 2. According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points) In order for a party to establish or prevail for a motion for summary judgment. They need to have sworn, certified, authenticated by affidavit. 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) 1. Paul Nadel and Evelyn Nadel ordered coffee and breakfast on the morning of December 1993 2. Paul Nadel turned left spilling hot coffee on his sons foot that caused 2nd degree burns. 3. Burger King manual read that the coffee was to be served at One hundred seventy-five degrees. 4. Medical records were true copies of what was received through discovery. 5. No warning label on the coffee container. 4. According to the case, why was this not......

Words: 753 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Burger King

...For this assignment, you will need to access the LexisNexis database in the Keller Library, from the Student Resources area under Course Home. Go to Kubasek, Chapter 13, page 369, problem 13-16. Use LexisNexis in the Keller library and look up the Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp. & Emil, Inc. case. Use the citation you find in your book to do the search. Read the case and answer these questions. Copy and paste this information into a Word document, include your name on that document, and answer the questions. 1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points) COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, HAMILTON COUNTY 2. According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points) 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) Plaintiff child was burned by spilled restaurant coffee. Plaintiffs, the child and his mother, grandmother, and father, filed an action in breach of warranty, products liability, and negligence against defendants, the restaurant franchisor and franchisee. The trial court granted the motions of both defendants for summary judgment. Plaintiffs appealed. The court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The spilled coffee was not so unforeseeable as to constitute an intervening cause. Summary judgment was proper for the breach of warranty claims because they were pre-empted by the Ohio Products Liability Law....

Words: 854 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Mgmt 520 Week 3 Homework

...your assignment has been graded. Your assignment is due by Sunday, end of Week 3, 11:59 p.m. (MT). (Note: You will not submit anything to the Homework CASE Dropbox. Questions 1-6: Week 3 Homework answers (there are 6 questions total). While viewing the Nadel v. Burger King & Emil case answer the following questions: 1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points) Answer: Court of Appeals Ohio, First District, Hamilton County 2. What must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points) Answer: In order to prevail on a motion for summary judgment, a movant has the burden to demonstrate that no genuine issue of material fact remains to be litigated; that is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and that it appears from the evidence, when viewed most strongly in favor of the nonmoving party, that reasonable minds can come to but tone conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the non-moving party. The movant in this case would be the Nadel family. Nadel v. Burger King Corp., 1997 WL 266762 (Ct. App, 1st Dist., Ohio) 3. Briefly – state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) Answer: The Christopher Nadel, the child was suffered severe burns by the hot coffee; spilled coffee is a forseeable circumstance from going through a drive through. It was undetermined if temperature the coffee was served at was too hot. It was determined there was no breach of......

Words: 1284 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Mgmt 520 Weekly Assignments

...MGMT 520 Weekly Assignments Click Link Below To Buy: http://hwcampus.com/shop/mgmt-520/mgmt-520-weekly-assignments/ Or Visit www.hwcampus.com MGMT 520 Week 2 Assignment Administrative Regulations Pick an administrative agency of either the federal or a state government. Find where the current and proposed regulation changes for that agency are located on the Internet (i.e., the Federal Register or the State Administrative Agency website.) Regulations.gov is a good place to begin your research. Pick one proposed regulation change currently under consideration (if you find one that has already closed out but interests you, you can use that instead) and write the following regarding it: 1. State the administrative agency that controls the regulation. Explain why this agency and your proposed regulation interests you (briefly). Will this proposed regulation affect you, or the business in which you are working? If so, how? Submit a copy of the proposed regulation along with your responses to these five questions. The proposed regulation can be submitted as either a separate Word document (.doc) or Adobe file (.pdf). This means you will submit two attachments to the Week 2 Dropbox: (a) a Word document with the questions and your answers, and (b) a copy of the proposed regulation you used for this assignment. (10 points) 2. Describe the proposal/change. (10 points) 3. Write the public comment that you would submit to this proposal. If the proposed regulation......

Words: 1632 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Mgmt 520 Weekly Assignments

...MGMT 520 Weekly Assignments Click Link Below To Buy: http://hwcampus.com/shop/mgmt-520/mgmt-520-weekly-assignments/ Or Visit www.hwcampus.com MGMT 520 Week 2 Assignment Administrative Regulations Pick an administrative agency of either the federal or a state government. Find where the current and proposed regulation changes for that agency are located on the Internet (i.e., the Federal Register or the State Administrative Agency website.) Regulations.gov is a good place to begin your research. Pick one proposed regulation change currently under consideration (if you find one that has already closed out but interests you, you can use that instead) and write the following regarding it: 1. State the administrative agency that controls the regulation. Explain why this agency and your proposed regulation interests you (briefly). Will this proposed regulation affect you, or the business in which you are working? If so, how? Submit a copy of the proposed regulation along with your responses to these five questions. The proposed regulation can be submitted as either a separate Word document (.doc) or Adobe file (.pdf). This means you will submit two attachments to the Week 2 Dropbox: (a) a Word document with the questions and your answers, and (b) a copy of the proposed regulation you used for this assignment. (10 points) 2. Describe the proposal/change. (10 points) 3. Write the public comment that you would submit to this proposal. If the proposed regulation......

Words: 1632 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Hot Coffee

...authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact cklink@luc.edu. CASE NOTES Courts split as to whether consumers injured by hot coffee can seek recovery by Zachary Rami Common sense, coffee and consumers clashed recently in McMahon v. Bunn-O-Matic,l wherein the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that a coffee maker manufacturer did not have a duty to warn consumers that its coffee would be served at 180 degrees, and that the coffee maker was not defectively designed. The decision, which affirmed a lower court's entry of summary judgment in favor of the coffee maker manufacturer, is consistent with a majority of courts, which have held in recent years that such claims leave no issue of material fact for trial.' However, not every jurisdiction has routinely dismissed these "coffee" cases. In fact, McMahon referred to Nadel v. Burger King,3 which held that a products liability claim for excessively hot coffee was appropriate for a jury to decide. This Note will discuss the facts and procedural history of McMahon, as well as the Seventh Circuit's ruling on the duty to warn and defectiveness of the product's design. This note will next examine the Ohio Court of Appeals' contrasting decision in Nadel. This comparison will...

Words: 3301 - Pages: 14

Premium Essay

Managment Paper

...Week 3 Assignment – Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp & Emil, Inc. case Question #1 – What court decided the case in the assignment? The judgment was granted to the defendants for breach of warranty, negligent infliction of emotion, and premises liability. Later the judgment on product liability was reversed because of punitive damages because of the difficulty to prove that the coffee was defective and that the coffee was the reason that the child suffered burns. Question #2 – According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? Questions #3 – Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis.  A child was burned  A breach of warranty did not occur  The spilled coffee was unforeseeable  An adequate warning did not exist in regard to the coffee’s temperature  Unable to determine if the coffee’s temperature was served too hot  Unable to apply negligence resulting in emotional damage Question #4 – According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? According to the case, this was not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress because the coffee was not actually spilled on the child by Burger King itself and the company did not take part in how the coffee was spilled on the child. The tort that was approved by the court was punitive damages. Punitive damages were approved......

Words: 263 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Mgmt 520 Weekly Assignments

...MGMT 520 Weekly Assignments Click Link Below To Buy: http://hwcampus.com/shop/mgmt-520/mgmt-520-weekly-assignments/ Or Visit www.hwcampus.com MGMT 520 Week 2 Assignment Administrative Regulations Pick an administrative agency of either the federal or a state government. Find where the current and proposed regulation changes for that agency are located on the Internet (i.e., the Federal Register or the State Administrative Agency website.) Regulations.gov is a good place to begin your research. Pick one proposed regulation change currently under consideration (if you find one that has already closed out but interests you, you can use that instead) and write the following regarding it: 1. State the administrative agency that controls the regulation. Explain why this agency and your proposed regulation interests you (briefly). Will this proposed regulation affect you, or the business in which you are working? If so, how? Submit a copy of the proposed regulation along with your responses to these five questions. The proposed regulation can be submitted as either a separate Word document (.doc) or Adobe file (.pdf). This means you will submit two attachments to the Week 2 Dropbox: (a) a Word document with the questions and your answers, and (b) a copy of the proposed regulation you used for this assignment. (10 points) 2. Describe the proposal/change. (10 points) 3. Write the public comment that you would submit to this proposal. If the proposed regulation......

Words: 1632 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Mgmt Case 3

...NOTE: Stacy Sullivan Download Request: Current Document: 1 Time Of Request: Saturday, May 24, 2014 19:09:31 EST Send To: NEXIS, 146BTS DEVRY UNIVERSITY 3005 HIGHLAND PKWY DOWNERS GROVE, IL 60515-5799 Source: OH Courts of Appeals Cases from 1913 Project ID: FOCUS - 1 of 1 DOCUMENT REBECCA KOOP, Plaintiff-Appellant, - vs - SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA, LLC, et al., Defendants-Appellees. CASE NO. CA2008-09-110 COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, WARREN COUNTY 2009-Ohio-1734; 2009 Ohio App. LEXIS 1469 April 13, 2009, Decided PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] CIVIL APPEAL FROM WARREN COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. Case No. 07CV69537. CASE SUMMARY: PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant personal injury victim filed suit against appellee store alleging that it was negligent in its cleaning of a coffee spill, upon which she slipped and fell. The store filed a motion for summary judgment. The Warren County Court of Common Pleas (Ohio) granted summary judgment for the store. The victim appealed. OVERVIEW: The victim argued that the trial court erred by failing to consider the incident report and corresponding witness statements. The appellate court held that the trial court did not err by disregarding the document due to its lack of authenticity. There was no indication that the document, purported to be an employee witness statement, was sworn or certified, nor was there any evidence presented to establish its......

Words: 3758 - Pages: 16

Premium Essay

Mgmt 520 Entire Course Legal Political Ethical Dimension of Business Keller

...MGMT 520 Entire Course Legal Political Ethical Dimension of Business Keller Click Link Below To Buy: http://hwcampus.com/shop/mgmt-520/mgmt-520-entire-course-legal-political-ethical-dimension-of-business-keller/ Or Visit www.hwcampus.com MGMT 520 Entire Course Legal Political Ethical Dimension of Business Keller MGMT 520 Discussions ALL 7 Weeks Posted by All Students 483 Pages Keller MGMT 520 National and International Ethics-Patent Week 1 Discussions 1 All Students Posts 41 Pages Keller Class in this thread we will seek to address essentially corporate citizenship. In other words, when the necessity from help arrives and your organization is the only organization that has what can deliver the society in which you operate in from peril, what do you do? In your discussion of the Bayer problem you will find yourself balancing and wondering, how do you overcome some of the barriers of doing the right thing from the corporate perspective? In the fall of 2001, anthrax was used as a weapon of terror in the United States, when it was sent to numerous media and political organizations and individuals, including Tom Brokaw of NBC News, Dan Rather of CBS News, and U.S. senators…. MGMT 520 Disbarment of Lawyers Week 1 Discussions 2 All Students Posts 35 Pages Keller Class I want to introduce to some “Wolves of Wall Street” who handled business in a Bernie Madoff type fashion, the Ponzi scheme way. Allow me to introduce you to former attorney, Marc Dreier. ...

Words: 20265 - Pages: 82

Premium Essay

Mgmt 520 Entire Course Legal Political Ethical Dimension of Business Keller

...MGMT 520 Entire Course Legal Political Ethical Dimension of Business Keller Click Link Below To Buy: http://hwcampus.com/shop/mgmt-520/mgmt-520-entire-course-legal-political-ethical-dimension-of-business-keller/ Or Visit www.hwcampus.com MGMT 520 Entire Course Legal Political Ethical Dimension of Business Keller MGMT 520 Discussions ALL 7 Weeks Posted by All Students 483 Pages Keller MGMT 520 National and International Ethics-Patent Week 1 Discussions 1 All Students Posts 41 Pages Keller Class in this thread we will seek to address essentially corporate citizenship. In other words, when the necessity from help arrives and your organization is the only organization that has what can deliver the society in which you operate in from peril, what do you do? In your discussion of the Bayer problem you will find yourself balancing and wondering, how do you overcome some of the barriers of doing the right thing from the corporate perspective? In the fall of 2001, anthrax was used as a weapon of terror in the United States, when it was sent to numerous media and political organizations and individuals, including Tom Brokaw of NBC News, Dan Rather of CBS News, and U.S. senators…. MGMT 520 Disbarment of Lawyers Week 1 Discussions 2 All Students Posts 35 Pages Keller Class I want to introduce to some “Wolves of Wall Street” who handled business in a Bernie Madoff type fashion, the Ponzi scheme way. Allow me to introduce you to former attorney, Marc Dreier. ...

Words: 20265 - Pages: 82

Free Essay

One Significant Change That Has Occurred in the World Between 1900 and 2005. Explain the Impact This Change Has Made on Our Lives and Why It Is an Important Change.

...E SSAYS ON TWENTIETH-C ENTURY H ISTORY In the series Critical Perspectives on the Past, edited by Susan Porter Benson, Stephen Brier, and Roy Rosenzweig Also in this series: Paula Hamilton and Linda Shopes, eds., Oral History and Public Memories Tiffany Ruby Patterson, Zora Neale Hurston and a History of Southern Life Lisa M. Fine, The Story of Reo Joe: Work, Kin, and Community in Autotown, U.S.A. Van Gosse and Richard Moser, eds., The World the Sixties Made: Politics and Culture in Recent America Joanne Meyerowitz, ed., History and September 11th John McMillian and Paul Buhle, eds., The New Left Revisited David M. Scobey, Empire City: The Making and Meaning of the New York City Landscape Gerda Lerner, Fireweed: A Political Autobiography Allida M. Black, ed., Modern American Queer History Eric Sandweiss, St. Louis: The Evolution of an American Urban Landscape Sam Wineburg, Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past Sharon Hartman Strom, Political Woman: Florence Luscomb and the Legacy of Radical Reform Michael Adas, ed., Agricultural and Pastoral Societies in Ancient and Classical History Jack Metzgar, Striking Steel: Solidarity Remembered Janis Appier, Policing Women: The Sexual Politics of Law Enforcement and the LAPD Allen Hunter, ed., Rethinking the Cold War Eric Foner, ed., The New American History. Revised and Expanded Edition E SSAYS ON _ T WENTIETH- C ENTURY H ISTORY Edited......

Words: 163893 - Pages: 656